Potentially he wont be here for years with the quota coming down, but one of the few players to impress this year.

Deserves another year without doubt.

We have so many other issues in the team, this obsession people have with the fullback position is baffling.

I agree but some of those may well need to be sorted by using Smiths quota spot and wage. It is not about the fullback spot for me, it is more about those other positions, but his contract and race count against him if we can bring real quality into other areas od the squad.

I accept that, but I see no evidence that we have real quality set to join us. I fully expect due to the quota rules, Phelps wont be here more than another 2 seasons.

That being said, he is the best fullback and the club and deserves to stay as long as possible due to his desire and pride in the jersey. Contrast that with Riddell/Fielden and I know who I would pick.

sadly though its not as simple as that. contracts must be honoured.

I know, but you understand the point I was making.

I agree but if we recruit two none federation trained players whether quality or not he will have to go. Same with Carmont.

If you want a quality prop and half back recruited, you can't keep Phelps as well.

What do people want most? To address the issues that most see as need addressing or reward an enthusiastic player? That is what it boils down to.

Dave

Yes but, its not really valid if the quality is available and contracts are honoured, sad but true.

Regarding Phelps he does give his all but that not enough for me, IF the quality is available. Were he at Salford or Celtic, Wigan fans would not praise him.

If we could sign Matt Orford & Dave Kidwell, then yeah, fine, Phelps will need to go, but if we are going for players at Darryl Griffin/Paul Johnson level then I will take Phelps everytime.

Phelps, what an absolute quality improvement he has made to our back line.

Yeah okay, we still conceding too many points for my liking, but I feel a hell of a lot safer with him at FB than anyone else in our team, including Pat.

Now we just need to tighten up the defensive line in front of him

Outshined Briscoe for me yday, and i know a lot of people would like him back.

Bottom line though is that if we can get a SH and PROP to come over from aus phelps will have to go.

He has to stay imo. He is safe as houses at the back and runs it out well. He gives it his all and we have bigger fish to fry then getting a new fullback in.

Long term we may look elsewhere but for next year he should be our number 1.

If Karl Pryce can get a contract, and Phelps doesn't, then the world has gone mad...

Phelps is looking decent in a poor team. Never proven to be save under a high ball that is being contested. Doesn't do anything outstanding, just looks half decent in that position.

If we ever wanna compete we need to let him go and bring in a better FB.

Although in an ideal world we would let Phelps go and bring in a top FB - such as who? Not a lot of top class full backs are available at present.

Given that we also need a top prop, a top class half-back quite possibly a second row (assuming we lose both Hock and Bailey or do we run youngsters??)

The salary cap will only go so far, even with the players we lose a prop and half-back would swallow up most of any free space.

We lose Hock, Smith possibly Bailey at the end of this season - would that be enough to sign a prop, half-back and full back (assuming we don't look for another 2nd row) - persoanlly I am not sure we would get a FB any better as prop and HB are surely the priority.

Look at it this way.
We're gonna be parting ways with-

Smith
Phelps
Coley
Hock
Bailey
Goulding

Thats 5 players. We really don't need another back rower when we have

Mossop
Lockers
J Tomkins
Hansen
Flanny
Farrell

to chose from. Mossop himself will be like a new signing.

The reserve team have had an outstanding season, many of their players deserve a chance in SL, many of these are backrowers.

So out of 6 players going I think we could bring in

Prop (maybe 2)
SH
and a FB.

Thats 3 maybe 4 players coming in for 6.

Pryce is federation trained Phelps isn't.

If Phelps has to leave because IL wants a different set of 6 none federation trained players in the squad then what it means is the new rules are actually doing what they are designed to do, limit the number of overseas players.

It's all about whether Phelps is good enough to be one of our 6 none federation trained players, not how he compares to the federation trained players such as Pryce.

Dave

Spot on.

We have only so many spots available, is Phelps good enough to take one of the spots? Considering how many other players are out there?

No.

The issue with the number of non federation slots available is a major factor however in my opinion you only dump someone who is using up a slot if you are getting someone in to do a better job in their position. We are looking to sign a half back and a prop. Assuming that both turn out to be non federation players we need to dump one. We are not looking to sign a full back as at least 3 players are competing for that role (remember IL's reference to the 7 props meaning it wasn't is priority when he took over).

We have a two perfectly good non quota hookers at the club one of whom is playing at half back and has been identified by our chairman as a hooker. The new half would allow him to play hooker and as the third hooker is a quota player and not needed he is the sensible one to offload. Particularly if as some people say he is homesick. The reserve and academy hookers can be used to compete with Tommy and McIlorum so we don't need a highly paid non fed hooker to do this at the cost of losing the best full back we currently have. We can look at improving our already very good backline when our pack and halves are sorted.

Id try and get Clint Greenshields in for next year, if we are to let Phelps leave.

Give the boy a decent contract, he deserves it, doesnt appear to be your typical, unpasionate Aussie, a two year contract with a third year option, and for god sake give him the No 1 shirt and leave him there!!!!

A lot of assumptions there - Coley and Bailey may leave but also may stay, Goulding is anyone's guess as to stay or go. Only Smith is certain to be leaving. So it could be we only lose say Smith, Hock and Bailey which means less money to spend. Time will tell.

A lot will depend on who is available and how much they cost and who the coach next season is - a different coach may see things differently.

I agree, I think my comments were based on what I feel is best for the team IMO.

Doesn't get enough credit and is very under rated IMO worth at least another year definitely

Was very impressive last night linked into the line well supported well. We were supposedly looking into him on loan early this year wouldnt of minded having him looks very good. BTW jhow slow has Amos Roberts gone??? 2 year ago he wouldnt of needed to pass that ball to richards he would have gone straight down the line and done it with ease. Prescott was your MOM last night for me

I reckon we need to dump two if we want to sign two none federations players, could be wrong but that is the way I worked it out. Smith and Bailey going just gets us down to 6 so two more would have to go and the only other two none federation players off contract are Carmont and Phelps.



If it was only that easy! I think it is fair to say if we could offload Riddell and Roberts those two would be 1st in line for the chop compared to Carmont and Phelps but unfrotunatley IL gave them both long deals.

We should by now be getting to the stage were old contracts signed by Mo were finally working their way out of the system but we have seemingly landed ourselves with two players long term who are not delivering. The trouble is we can't just pick who we offload.



The only way this is going to happen is if Riddell agrees to leave and I see no indication of that and suspect the home sick rumours are wishful thinking by some fans.

Dave